Wairarapa Times-Age SATURDAY, JULY 16, 1938. TRANSPORT COSTS AND CONTROL.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 16 July 1938, Page 4

Wairarapa Times-Age SATURDAY, JULY 16, 1938. TRANSPORT COSTS AND CONTROL.

A, 8 part and parcel of a vigorous protest against “the endless mounting of costs,” delegates to the Dominion conference of the Farmers’ Union which has just concluded specifically condemned the increase of farmers’ costs through the operation of the Transport Act. In the extent to which it can be shown that the exercise of powers conferred by the Transport Act is increasing costs, that measure of course is fairly open to attack. A careful verification of the facts of the position seems desirable, however, before an attack of the kind is launched. Questioning, at the conference, whether the operation of the Transport Act had made for efficiency and reduced costs, Mr P. J. O’Regan said, as he is reported:— Monopolies were being created, which, he submitted, were a danger to the public. The creation of monopolies was entirely at variance with the constitution of the country, under which no one body of men could be entrusted with government. Competition was a vital safeguard of freedom. An element of monopoly admittedly is inseparable from the control and co-ordination of transport, but that has not prevented the establishment (in the interests of efficiency and economy) of transport monopolies in countries in which even greater regard is paid than in New Zealand to the value of economic competition as a safeguard.

All London passenger transport services, for example, except those of the main line railways, have been consolidated under a public corporation—the London Passenger Transport Board. Shareholders in the various transport services brought, under the control of this board “can still receive a return varying in some small degree with the profitableness of the undertaking,” but the general aim. is that of “rendering to the public the most efficient service that is consistent with covering' the costs (iitcluding the capital costs) of the undertaking'.”

This is only one of many specific examples which may be cited of the application to transport of a policy setting aside competition in favour of controlled regulation. Measures of transport regulation, enforcing co-ordination are now in operation in most countries of advanced development. Under a scheme of this kind which has been in force in Northern Ireland for- several years, a Road Board was constituted' to acquire any road motor services and operate them as a co-ordinated whole, under conditions of large-scale operation and central control. Provision is made also for the pooling of net receipts and effective co ordination and division of activities as between the Road Board- and railway companies.

The report of the New Zealand Transport Department in 1935 observed of the Northern Ireland scheme that it “was the culmination of. experience gained in other countries and from previous Acts. The basis now appears to be laid for practical and successful measures towards the solution of the road-rail problem.”

That it eliminates or restricts competition and establishes a measure of monopoly is not in these days an effective line of attack upon a policy of transport control. In Britain and elsewhere, competition has been set aside in favour of control because it has been found that unrestricted competition in transport is incompatible with economy and entails inevitable waste.

Since, however, control of transport introduces of necessity the element of monopoly, every care should be taken to safeguard the paramount interest —that of the people who pay for transport service. The safeguarding of those upon whom the costs of transport ultimately fall would best be ensured by creating an independent appeal tribunal, free to determine in the public interest and in light of expert advice all contentious issues arising out of the regulation and co-ordination of transport services. It is on these lines, rather than by advocating a reversion to unrestricted competition in transport service, that farmers and other people may most hopefully seek relief from needlessly heavy transport costs.